I do hope however that Democrats continue calling Arizonans "racist". The +70% of Americans that support Arizona's immigration law absolutely love hearing that they are racist for wanting to do something about immigration when this President has shown himself completely impotent in leading on this issue.

I don't even support the Arizona law, but please Democrats PLEASE continue to call tea partiers by the derogatory and sexually-tendered name of teabaggers - the majority of Americans, who think favorably of the teapartiers - will surely lap up your calling their friends, neighbors and fellow employees names.

What makes a guy like Obama so degrade the Presidency by calling other groups of Americans names. Please help me out here and give me examples of Bush and Clinotn and Reagan and . . .

Good luck with that.

Obama -whom I have defended on this blog more than any other conservative - is fast loosing his credibility with me. What a maroon!

Ouch Ann. I think you used the term countertenor incorrectly. Tenor generally means tone..as in setting the tone (setting the tenor). A countertenor is a "high tenor" or one with a high voice and the better or older version that is more musically correct is countratenor or a male singing in the "alto" range. Chanticleer has two contratenors for instance but none "sets" the contratenor..they sing it.

If you're not in the political class, you don't understand who his audience was with this comment. It's not who you think it is.

Obama is talking to his fellow members in the political class (folks like Republican Carly Fiorina who called Republicans racists yesterday for supporting the Arizona immigration law and folks like Bloomberg who initially tried to pin blme for the car bomb on angry Tea Baggers upset about health care).

Obama is telling his fellow travelers in political circles that the GOP shouldn't have whipped the people up so feverishly because now a third party is close to coming to exist that threatens both Republicans and Democrat incumbents.

Obama is not talking to the American people here. He's talking to others in government - warning them that the Tea Party will upset both apple carts. He's laying the groundwork to ask Republicans to join him in defeating Tea Baggers.

Obama's incivility is a big disappointment for me. I voted for McCain but, in time, realized that Obama was much less likely to get us into another war. I am sure McCain would have taken us to was against Iran by now - and who knows what are relationship with Russia or China would be like?

However, I did believe Obama's promise of working to united the country and post-partisanship etc. He has been one of the most divisive presidents we've had. No one can know, of course, but it seems like he cannot deal with criticism or opposition. And as far as reaching out - I haven't seen it.

realized that Obama was much less likely to get us into another war. I am sure McCain would have taken us to was against Iran by now -

Because going to war is the absolute WORST thing that can befall either a person or a nation, right? Sure we could ask Anne Frank, or the people of Pnom Penh, or 20 million Soviet citizens, or 30 million Chinese peasants, or several million Indonesians...oh except we CAN'T, can we? They all died in a genocide.

So if Iran gets nuclear weapons and decides to hasten the arrival of the 12 Imam, by using nuclear weapons against Tel Aviv, well there'll have been a war ANY WAY....

Just kind of like the folks who opposed the US entry into WWII, they didn't want to fight a war, either, but somehow neither Hitler nor Tojo paid much attention. Just because you don't want to fight doesn't mean the other guy will respect your desire.

And so being "at war" with Iran would be bad, eh? An absolute bad? A relative bad? Gas at $6.00 a gallon, the economy in recession ,millions starving in the Third World, and several hundred thousand dead Israelis-Arab AND Jew, all those would be preferable to war with Iran?

Please provide some explanation, provide evidence to support your assertions. Try to show all your work.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a total public meltdown in the near future.

I think you saw an inkling of it at Barbare (Call me Senator) Boxer's soire where he was getting heckeled and he did that look, the one where he tips back his head and looks down his nose. Then the 'wanna come down here' and say it to my face response.

Please provide some explanation, provide evidence to support your assertions. Try to show all your work.

From my preferred isolationist standpoint, yeah it would be bad for us. Honestly I could care less about the rest since the rest don’t give much care for us. Personally I’m tired of being the go to guy when things in the world go to hell in a hand basket only to be lectured by latte sipping intellectuals on how we FUBARed everything.

Yes that’s a callous position but there it is. Seven years ago we took out one of the worst dictators since Pol Pot and tried to usher in a free society and instead become a pariah in the eyes of the so called free world. Evidently the mass graves created by Saddam over his reign didn’t stir any guilt in the anti-war crowd so you’ll have to forgive me for my lack of compassion should tens of thousands of more die because the same folks wanted to dialogue the Iranians to death.

The thing is I’m pretty sure the Euros (and the Sunni Arab states) were hoping and praying that Bush would have bombed Iran because that would have give them the twofer they were hoping for (1)destroyed or severely degraded Iranian nukes and (2) the perfect whipping post to fire up the base at home. If everyone is so sure that Iran is building nukes then they need to step up and create a unified military front. If not then we shouldn’t have to do the heavy lifting for them.

Lol - First question - are you Christian?Practicing, believing Catholic Convert….and have you never heard of “Just War Theory” and have you not read Jesus’ words, “… and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

Why do you wish an explanation? Is it not obvious that war is hell? War is always a tragedy?

Your “answer” makes no sense…because something is “Hell” does that mean it is not worthwhile? Divorce is “hellish” but is preferable to living with an violent substance abuser, is it not?

Again justify your answer. Why would being at war with Iran, be bad, IF the alternatives are worse? Or rather, you feel that NOT being at war with Iran is preferable to being at war with Iran? Why? Justify yourself.

I can create scenarios where millions die without recourse to war with Iran, in fact, suggested the outlines of one in my response to you. Iran with nuclear weapons, uses them to attack Israel, the ensuing crisis, closes the Straits of Hormuz, gas skyrockets, the US economy plunges back into recession. The Third World, unable to afford fuel, suffers far worse, and millions die of disease and malnutrition. Several hundred thousand Israelis, Jew and Arab Israelis alike, are dead. This is preferable to war with Iran, because…….? Defend your thesis, provide evidence to support your work, be complete.

Further there is an underlying assumption that IF you wish to avoid war, it can be avoided. The people of Britain, France and the United States wished to avoid war with Germany and Japan, did they succeed? If not why, not? How was it that their desires to avoid war failed to produce the desired end state? Is this a fair statement, if not, why not? Provide evidence to back up your assertions, please try to show all your work.

Chase -- "Please help me out here and give me examples of Bush and Clinotn and Reagan and . . ." Well, there was Nixon -- though even he kept his crasser insults for what he thought was private conversation with his aides, rather than freely sharing them in interviews. The mean and petty Obama can't even measure up to RMN's debased standard -- he has all the presidential gravitas of a racetrack tout.

As Gandalf told Frodo, "You can Fence Yourselves In, but You Can Not Fence the World Out."

Ask Lindbergh or the Oxford Union how the attempt to avoid war, succeeded.

You misunderstood my point. I don't harbor any misconceptions we could avoid war I just don't think we should be the ones to pre-empt the Iranians. Let the French or Brits step up for a change.

Ever watch Dirty Jobs? I see us being the Mike Rowe but without the popularity and hot babes wanting to bear our children.

My point is that I just don't care about the consequences that may befall others because no one else does either and our past efforts at caring Somalia, Bosnia, etc. were nothing more than more opportunities for US bashing.

I don't disagree that war isn't ncessarily the worst thing with Iran. I'm simply calling out the rest of the 'international community' to step up to the plate.

I couldn't even get sunsong to answer the question "Is rape wrong?" on another thread, so good luck getting something more complex out of him/her. Most likely, you'll get more beauty queen type platitudes since it's about all he/she has.

Dubya wanted to be a uniter, not a divider, but the Lefties' perpetual tantrum (ongoing since about 1966) wouldn't allow that. They were more interested in how much power they could wring from demonizing him.

The Zero has always been about breaking people up into petty, bickering camps, the hallmark of the Left. The whole 'get in their faces', bitter clinger business told anybody who wanted to listen what he really thought.

Chase said...

Smart man, stupid politician.

Let me see his academic transcripts. You may be right, but I really doubt it.

HDHouse said...

Chase said..."Obama -whom I have defended on this blog more than any other conservative - is fast loosing his credibility with me. What a maroon!"

Ahhh Chase, I think he is black..not maroon....

Actually he is maroon, in the true sense of the color spectrum. It's a synonym for chestnut. When Bugs Bunny used to say, "What a maroon", it was also a racial slur.

Joe said...

Lol - First question - are you Christian? Practicing, believing Catholic Convert….and have you never heard of “Just War Theory” and have you not read Jesus’ words, “

Having gone to a Catholic university during the Vietnam War years,I was inundated with Just War Theory. One thing I noticed was that it could be stretched to justify almost anything, if you worked at it.

Having gone to a Catholic university during the Vietnam War years,I was inundated with Just War Theory. One thing I noticed was that it could be stretched to justify almost anything, if you worked at it.

The beauty of Catholicism....that and the beer, the cigars, the bingo, the bratwurst, and the casino tent(s).

The angriest President in our nation's history is really starting to fray at the edges. I wouldn't be surprised to see a total public meltdown in the near future.

Serious hypothetical question: Say a POTUS had a total public meltdown, after say, oh I don't know, doing weird things like sending out SWAT teams on grandmothers, talking about "57 states", not acting for twelve days during a serious environmental crisis, etc.

Time to consider the 25th Amendment? (Hey there was high-level talk about it when Reagan appeared "forgetful" in his second term)

"The first to use that term was I believe Anderson Cooper (speaking from which he knows I guess) and the left-wing MSM lapped it up with a spoon until now even our community organizer in chief uses it."

This is the truth. A lot of teabagger websites cropped up around that time, and most of them were obvious astroturf bullshit.

There was a movement to mail teabags to congressmen (which was treated as terrorism for some reason), but only the depraved knew about the 'hard to talk with balls in your mouth' idea that Cooper found so newsworthy.

they report that, but did they report on the rape rooms CNN found in Bagdad? No. Because they are viciously partisan. So partisan they can't even admit to being partisan like MSNBC does, because they want so badly to impact independent voters.

Rush Limbaugh listeners were polled and are far more informed that CNN viewers. In fact, CNN is just about the worst way to get information on the planet. Worse than VH1 or the home shopping network.

To these people, it's a fact that someone on the right accidentally called themselves a Teabagger, and because they were ignorant of the vulgarity, it's fair game. This isn't the truth, and it's not even good logic. I never hear the N word used by white people, but if I call Obama the N word the way he calls me a scrotum sucker, I think that's extremely ugly and I have no excuse.

"If you're right and Obama said "teabaggers" with full knowledge and intent, then we have an extremely foolish and arrogant president and all of us should be a lot more concerned than we are.

I don't like Obama, but I give him a little more credit than that."

He would have to be extremely ignorant not to be aware of the term. If it were a term from the right, it would be obvious this was 'insensitive'. He was just telling us to know both sides of a debate, and he doesn't know teabagger is deeply offensive to most people? Strangely, every idiot on the left figured it out when Cooper started chortling about how hard it is to talk when teabagging.

Obama's dumber than all these greasy little potheads? Cocaine is a hell of a drug.

Obama flipped off Hillary and Palin, too, and called Palin a pig. He went to Rev Wright's church and brainwashed his kids with antisemitism and anti american fantasies about CIA-AIDS. He was close friends with Bill Ayers, a man who praised RFK's assassin and tried to kill a lot of innocent people.

HDHouse said..."Ouch Ann. I think you used the term countertenor incorrectly. Tenor generally means tone..as in setting the tone (setting the tenor). A countertenor is a "high tenor" or one with a high voice and the better or older version that is more musically correct is countratenor or a male singing in the "alto" range. Chanticleer has two contratenors for instance but none "sets" the contratenor..they sing it."

Ouch, HD. I think you missed some humor. Click on more links, and you may get more of the jokes. Also, when it seems like I've said something wrong, take that as a cue to up your game.

What is it with so many Christians that you think you are *owed* an explanation for someone's opinion. I've expressed my opinion. I don't want war. I'm glad that McCain is not president because he probably would have taken us to war with Iran by now. I do not want that. There is no reason for me to *justify* that to you. I don't owe you that.

As a dear friend of mine says, peace is better than war because it is more fun

or another friend who says: peace is stronger than war because it heals

I am being kind giving you more information than you are entitled to - even though I am sure there is nothing I could say that would change your mind. You seem quite convinced that war is a fine choice. I don't. I have a different opinion than you. Why does that necessitate an argument in which you *demand* that I "justify" my view? Why is it so difficult for Christians to understand that not everyone holds the same beliefs, opinions, thoughts, feelings or attitudes?

Have you really considered what might happen if we went to war with Iran and Russia and/or China decided to join in on Iran's side?

@Hoosier Seven years ago we took out one of the worst dictators since Pol Pot and tried to usher in a free society and instead become a pariah in the eyes of the so called free world.

Yeah -- but you know what? The Iraqis don't hate us like they were supposed to. When my son who is there asked one of his interpreters (I think he was a former MIG pilot for Saddam who took off his uniform and went home) last year what his thoughts were -- good? bad? He said they were both. Bad because people died. Good because Saddam was gone.

It's a bit like watching a victim of domestic violence wake up and see the sunshine and smell the fresh air. Sometimes it takes a while.

I don't care what they say in Europe now.

Last month we visited my SIL's father's grave at Epinal in France. I took a picture of a couple pages in the visitors book. More than 50 years later, the comments made me weep as person after person wrote "Merci!" "Merci." and noted the courage and sacrifice of the men buried there.

The family of the men who took the officer's body from the side of the road where he was killed and put it in the church will feast every one of his family who have shown up in the little village in the last ten years and weep as they thank us -- who have done nothing.

So sunsong and others -- some tragedies prevent others. And with time I am thinking we will see the evidence that Iraq was sonmething that needed to be done.

Having gone to a Catholic university during the Vietnam War years,I was inundated with Just War Theory. One thing I noticed was that it could be stretched to justify almost anything, if you worked at it.

The beauty of Catholicism....that and the beer, the cigars, the bingo, the bratwurst, and the casino tent(s).

Jeremy, the only people I ever hear say the N Word are black. Does that mean it's OK to call them the N word when I want to mock them?

Like the sexual definition of 'teabaggers' and the original idea of the n word, the Tea Partiers and blacks didn't actually come up with the term. In fact, all the 'teabagger' websites sourced as the original users seem to be astroturf and Anderson Cooper is widely credited with inventing this slur.

But I don't see the difference. I've never seen a Tea Partier call themselves teabagger unless they are being ironic. The term is offensive for the exact same reason the n word is offensive. Hate should be avoided out of basic decency.

As a partisan, I guess I'm glad Obama is exposed again, but as an American, it sucks that Obama just isn't up to the job. There's no way Bush would stoop to this.

What is it with so many Christians that you think you are *owed* an explanation for someone's opinion. I've expressed my opinion. I don't want war.Because opinions are indeed like @rseholes, everyone has one, some are smellier than others. The difference between opinions is the quality of the reasoning and evidence that support them.

As a dear friend of mine says, peace is better than war because it is more fun Well I’m sure that the residents of the Warsaw Ghetto would disagree, they were at peace with the Germans. Of course, the Poles who lived within German-Occupied Poland would also find that an odd statement. Anne Frank was in a nation at peace with Germany. The Jews of France, were in a nation at peace with Germany.

The Burmese and Indonesians were at peace with Japan; the Manchukuo’s were at peace with Japan. The Koreans were at peace with the Japanese, from 1904. All told, I’d bet that these people were killed in droves, whilst at peace.

So, let’s get on with this discussion of Peace more fun than war.

or another friend who says: peace is stronger than war because it heals

Really, all the above would seem to suggest that Healing doesn’t occur under peace.You seem quite convinced that war is a fine choice. I don't. Did I say “war is fine” I simply pointed out that war isn’t all bad or rather that this idea of “peace” you have isn’t such great thing.

I have a different opinion than you. Why does that necessitate an argument in which you *demand* that I "justify" my view? Well when you blithely come in and express it and expect us all to stand around and nod our heads at your “sage wisdom.” I’m afraid you’re going to have to do a little better. 10 year old’s have opinions too, but generally we don’t pay much attention to them, because they are usually childish and ill-conceived. As the Bible says, “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child. But, when I became a man, I put away the things of a child.” You are reasoning as a child. It is now time to begin to think and speak as an adult. Simply saying you believe something doesn’t make it so.

Why is it so difficult for Christians to understand that not everyone holds the same beliefs, opinions, thoughts, feelings or attitudes?

Small newsflash Sunsong, I’ve debated with Marxists, Evangelicals, Professors of all varying stripes and opinions. There is no one who knows better than I that people hold differing opinions. What makes the process fun and valuable is the discussion and the logic and the evidence presented.

So, what did want, just to come in and make a little “profound” statements that are illogical and nonsensical. And the best you can do is fall back on, “It’s what I believe, neener-neener.”

Have you really considered what might happen if we went to war with Iran and Russia and/or China decided to join in on Iran's side?

Have you ever thought that Russia and China have no desire to go to war, FOR Iran, and that Iran has little desire to go to “war” either?

Yes. Civility. I'd rather lose than win ugly, because winning ugly doesn't move us closer to an honest government that works for the people instead of for itself. That's a sentiment that should appeal to Tea Party supporters.

When Anderson Cooper made his snide remark, I knew he was being an asshole. I'm not so sure about Obama. There were a lot of people calling Tea Party folks "teabaggers" and I know they didn't all know the sexual connotations of the word. It went pretty mainstream before everyone caught on.

I had to explain it to my middle-aged parents and my grandparents because they didn't know why it was offensive.

The only reason I knew what it meant was because I saw the movie Pecker about a decade ago.

Not everyone is a gay man, a Howard Stern listener or an avid reader of the Urban Dictionary.

Either you guys are being disingenuous because you're all right-wing-Alinsky, or you think Barack Obama is a lot dumber than I do.

"Either you guys are being disingenuous because you're all right-wing-Alinsky, or you think Barack Obama is a lot dumber than I do."

We're certainly not being disingenuous.

If you really think Obama had no idea what that meant, despite being an Andrew Sullivan and Huffpo reader, then I honestly just can't understand where you're coming from. It's simply untrue that Obama has no idea what the connotation is. He has staff prepare news stories for him to read. He is well informed of US Political issues and aware of the Tea Party's general issues and stories.

Now, it does seem nasty and counterproductive. I agree it's hard to understand why Obama thinks this is a good idea for his discourse. I don't think he's dumb, and I'm certainly not holding him up to a different set of rules a la Alinksi, so much as holding him up to his own (he would call me stupid for such insensitivity, etc).

I think he's got a strong record of agitation. He's one of those lawyers who bullied banks into giving bad loans with ACORN. He's not a sweetie. Read Alinksi and understand why us mocking Obama's lack of civility is not an example while learning why Obama might want to agitate the middle and the right. Once you do, this kind of crap becomes predictable.

George Alan Rekers, a Baptist minister who is a leader of the anti-gay movement, was caught in a Miami airport with a male escort whose online profile at Rentboy.com advertises his “smooth, sweet, tight ass.”

It appears that Rekers, who founded the Family Research Council with James Dobson, took the escort on a 10-day trip to Europe.

"Still think it was probably a slip and not an intentional attempt to agitate his political opponents. Seems too counterproductive."

All right all right all right.

That's certainly very plausible. I think you're being very civil and that's a good thing. I would be happy if Obama apologized for behaving stupidly. These are good peaceful Americans who have been put through the ringer and smeared so many times, but have behaved extremely honorably at many protests. They deserve a lot of respect for their remarkably awesome class, and their president should at least respect them.

I'm just amazed at how violent the may day democrat protests have been, and how ugly the SEIU and antiwar protests were. It's worth a little appreciation when so many people show how a real protest movement should act.

If Obama goofed and says he's sorry, I think it would really boost his credibility and help the country deal with her division. If Obama lets this kind of thing stand, he's making yet another little cut to the festering division that has been so ugly since Gore tried to steal Florida.

I think we have all come to expect these quick, flip words from past and present members of the Harvard Law Review. Do people of this class deserve any place in public life?...Dollars to donuts, Obama uses the term "undocumented immigrants" versus "illegal aliens" when he discusses the immigration issue. This is in accordance with the rule that you call people by the term which they prefer to be known as.